But at what point are the fundamentals strong enough to transition to tactical stuff? how much time does one invest in "proper" mechanics before the returns start to diminish as compared to the high-speed/hard-core "tactical ted" stuff?

I am asking this as a thought experiment to all the amateur and pro shooters we have here. If you were to design a program for teh uber-noob who has no plans of ever becoming a tier one (or two or even three) operator, but may need to engage in pistol combat at some point (insert MacGuffin here), how much time/energy/money/effort do you sink into the base fundamentals before teaching actual fighting.

And lo, Kano looked down upon the field and saw the multitudes. Amongst them were the disciples of Uesheba who were greatly vexed at his sayings. And Kano spake: "Do not be concerned with the mote in thy neighbor's eye, when verily thou hast a massive stick in thine ass".

Definitely a possibility. You guys who regularly train in a team environment can assess how common those shortcomings are better than I can.

Well, I know a few guys that couldn't shoot their way out of a paper bag but they love cool toys. Every time I've shot with them, they were way more concerned about looking cool. They didn't even check their targets after each round of fire.

But most everyone I know huts also, and we spend lots of time sighting in our rifles and plinking. So you have to be able to shoot or get laughed at.

And I think some just forget about the fundamentals over time. Worried more about the cool stuff.

His heart was visible, and the dismal sack that maketh excrement of what is eaten.

Join Date

Mar 2006

Posts

7,345

Posted On:8/12/2013 11:47am

--

Originally Posted by Scrapper

But at what point are the fundamentals strong enough to transition to tactical stuff? how much time does one invest in "proper" mechanics before the returns start to diminish as compared to the high-speed/hard-core "tactical ted" stuff?

I am asking this as a thought experiment to all the amateur and pro shooters we have here. If you were to design a program for teh uber-noob who has no plans of ever becoming a tier one (or two or even three) operator, but may need to engage in pistol combat at some point (insert MacGuffin here), how much time/energy/money/effort do you sink into the base fundamentals before teaching actual fighting.

But at what point are the fundamentals strong enough to transition to tactical stuff? how much time does one invest in "proper" mechanics before the returns start to diminish as compared to the high-speed/hard-core "tactical ted" stuff?

I am asking this as a thought experiment to all the amateur and pro shooters we have here. If you were to design a program for teh uber-noob who has no plans of ever becoming a tier one (or two or even three) operator, but may need to engage in pistol combat at some point (insert MacGuffin here), how much time/energy/money/effort do you sink into the base fundamentals before teaching actual fighting.

That's an interesting question because you only have a short amount of time to prepare someone to work on the street. Most academy lengths are a few months. So in that time you have to get fundamental shooting, tactical shooting, and legal stuff all thrown in. Plus the cost of rounds. And that may be where people get screwed up. Learning tactical and fundamentals at the same time.

But at what point are the fundamentals strong enough to transition to tactical stuff? how much time does one invest in "proper" mechanics before the returns start to diminish as compared to the high-speed/hard-core "tactical ted" stuff?

I am asking this as a thought experiment to all the amateur and pro shooters we have here. If you were to design a program for teh uber-noob who has no plans of ever becoming a tier one (or two or even three) operator, but may need to engage in pistol combat at some point (insert MacGuffin here), how much time/energy/money/effort do you sink into the base fundamentals before teaching actual fighting.

From my amateur/enthusiast/SD perspective... I have no advanced training - yet. Fundamentals I would consider a number of the things already mentioned - grip, trigger control, sight picture. I would throw in basic firearm operation and the situationals like "when to draw," and "when to shoot." The person should be able to handle FTF/FTE easily and know how to handle duds, squibs, and hang fires. All of those are fairly objective, I think, and can be measured/graded without much difficulty.

And, of course, the person should be able to hit a target. Ideally, I would say 100% COM at 5 yards, which would be at worst about 66% at 8 yards, right? I don't think I would have accuracy at 8 yards as a prerequisite to "advanced," training, but it may be an interesting tool to gauge the performance of the individual and of the advanced training methods, should you bookend the training with range time (which you should, because how else are you going to tell if you're better?)

Here's where the line starts to get fuzzy for me. Comfort with the firearm, which may be very subjective. Production should be fluid and controlled. The person shouldn't get the shakes after firing a few rounds (I've taken several friends out for their first shot, this happens a lot). The person should be able to maintain positive control of the firearm, and have an innate awareness of where the gun is and where the barrel is pointing.

The objective stuff is probably a few hours (5 max I would say) of dedicated training. Accuracy will probably require one-on-one interaction with an instructor, but can be combined with range time. The subjective stuff will come with range time, and will depend on the individual.

Here's the key point - and I think this is where I put words in devil's mouth, you can't just pass the fundamentals and be done - you have to practice them regularly, so maybe a refresher course should be a prereq to advanced if you haven't done a fundamentals track in, say, the last 12 months (maybe it is, see first paragraph where I say I haven't taken any advanced courses, yet).

I imagine that at various competencies you transition to the next element.

If you have an eight-inch group at fast fire at 8 yards, then you are probably good enough for drawing, moving, shoot-and-move, etc stuff. For most people, that's going to be two long training days minimum, probably more. But that feel's too early to be moving on to me,

because then you are back at square one when all the new elements make you a wild spaztard again.

And lo, Kano looked down upon the field and saw the multitudes. Amongst them were the disciples of Uesheba who were greatly vexed at his sayings. And Kano spake: "Do not be concerned with the mote in thy neighbor's eye, when verily thou hast a massive stick in thine ass".

Does it really matted if your trigger pull is flawless and your follow-through picture perfect if your bad guy is no more dead than the guy who sprays like a spaztard but gets hits?

My heart says "Yes!" but my brain asks "why?"

IMHO it does.

You want your rounds on target. Not flying through the air hitting whatever or whomever happens to be in their way. That point alone is a major fundamental.

Being able to shoot while doing acrobatics or contortions is cool but what's it worth if you can't hit the BG?

Heck if you want to you can shoot and miss without any expensive training at all! You can even strike a sweet pose. Throw on some high speed / low drag wrap arounds and a tactical vest. Have fun with it!

IMO It's all a trade off of accuracy vs speed. If one guy can one hole it at 7 yards and another can dump two mags at "minute of COM" into two targets in 1/4 the time Ill take man number 2. If you are missing the target entirely at a blazing pace then you better slow it down.

Then there's range to the target. At bad breath range there's a little wiggle room in regards to the fundamentals..trying to hit a guy at 25 yards? Way different story.

I imagine that at various competencies you transition to the next element.

I agree with your addition. I have a much easier job in teaching a basic class to women than trying to coach veteran police officers (egos tend to get in the way). If someone has the fundamentals down tightening the group isn't that big of a challenge.

I imagine that at various competencies you transition to the next element.

If you have an eight-inch group at fast fire at 8 yards, then you are probably good enough for drawing, moving, shoot-and-move, etc stuff. For most people, that's going to be two long training days minimum, probably more. But that feel's too early to be moving on to me,

because then you are back at square one when all the new elements make you a wild spaztard again.

I somewhat agree - consider any respectable belted art: your mastery of the art is not just based on your ability to digest the material, but your ability to apply that knowledge over a long period of time and in progressively more difficult scenarios.

In the civilian world, quality firearms training seems to be sparse (probably a whole other discussion, there). The upshot is that it's only in very small circles (some military, some LEO, very little civilian) that *continuing* training is required or even desirable, which is a marked difference from other "martial arts."

It may just be that guns are easy enough to use and get the desired result without any training.